Two Florida school officials won't go to jail for praying

[--Pete]

Hi,

And theologians are scientists, just like a professor in French language or law is a scientist....it doesn't have to be quantifiable te be science.

Strictly speaking, no. Scientists are people who practice science. Science is a way of investigating nature through the application of the scientific method. Neither theology, nor French, nor law are studied using the scientific method. Thus none of them are sciences. Neither, by the way, is mathematics.

--Pete

EDIT: BTW, that link is to a very poorly written article which is factually pretty accurate.

[kandrathe]

First, I know what it means, I just find it strange that you mention theologians instead of priests.

I would use the term to differentiate from those who are merely uninformed pontificators. I would say one difference would be that theologians are seekers of truth and knowledge, while someone like Pat Robertson seeks to obfuscate and confuse people enough to send him money. He's more like a rock star, seeking fans and groupies.

You have the same problem in politics. Most politicians these days are not motivated by the opportunity to serve and represent the people. They also lie, obfuscate and confuse people enough to send them money and then vote for them.

In fact, "uninformed" is really the crux of the problem with both politics and religion.

[eppie]

I would use the term to differentiate from those who are merely uninformed pontificators. I would say one difference would be that theologians are seekers of truth and knowledge, while someone like Pat Robertson seeks to obfuscate and confuse people enough to send him money. He's more like a rock star, seeking fans and groupies.

You have the same problem in politics. Most politicians these days are not motivated by the opportunity to serve and represent the people. They also lie, obfuscate and confuse people enough to send them money and then vote for them.

In fact, "uninformed" is really the crux of the problem with both politics and religion.

OK let's get back to the initial problem then. Those guys at that school were they theologians (theologists sounds better to me) or Pat Robertson types? They were not seekers of truth, they were people that used their authority to start something that they thought was right, not thinking about feelings of other people......more Pat Robertson-like if you ask me.

I have no problems with theologians (apart from that in my opinion they are doing useless things) and would never try to stop them from what they are doing.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I have no problems with theologians (apart from that in my opinion they are doing useless things) and would never try to stop them from what they are doing.

Actually, the definition of theologian is one who studies religions. In that sense, what they are doing is no more or less useful than studying literature, history, archeology, etc. They are all fields that enrich our knowledge without contributing directly to our material well being. The fact that many (if not most) theologians entered the field in the hope of somehow 'proving' their beliefs supports your statement. But those who are true seekers of the truth, and who try to understand the commonalities and differences in religions, its source, and its appeal are actually on the forefront of demystifying religion and moving it to its appropriate place as myth and superstition. And studying their work should be required for all.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

OK let's get back to the initial problem then. Those guys at that school were they theologians (theologists sounds better to me) or Pat Robertson types? They were not seekers of truth, they were people that used their authority to start something that they thought was right, not thinking about feelings of other people......more Pat Robertson-like if you ask me.

I have no problems with theologians (apart from that in my opinion they are doing useless things) and would never try to stop them from what they are doing.

That is a better question. Are they proselytizing, or merely practicing what they believe? They aren't passing the hat for contributions as Pat does. I wouldn't deny a Muslim a prayer rug, and time during the allotted prayer times. We make public allowances for custom and tradition in meal preparation for various faiths all the time. Would there be an uproar if the principal asked a school official to bless a school meal in the name of Allah, or the Hindu goddess Annapurnu, or the Wiccan goddess of Demeter? Not in the same way. It probably would have caused an uproar at the next PTA meeting, but I bet the Christians would have been upset. The ACLU might have reacted equally, but the jury is out on that one.<blockquote>"The Pensacola News Journal reported late Thursday that after a full day of testimony, Judge M. Case Rodgers said the prayer at a field house dedication during the school day that was held on church property* was spontaneous, and there was seemingly no intent to violate the order."</blockquote> * bolded by me.

So, this was a school event, held at a church with voluntary attendance.

[kandrathe]

Then again, I went to high school in Georgia, where we studied the 1861-1865 War of Northern Aggression.

Vervloekt Jan-Kees!

[Jester]

That is a better question. Are they proselytizing, or merely practicing what they believe? They aren't passing the hat for contributions as Pat does. I wouldn't deny a Muslim a prayer rug, and time during the allotted prayer times. We make public allowances for custom and tradition in meal preparation for various faiths all the time.

At a personal level, yes. If you wanted to pray before your own meal, there is no prohibition. The problem is that this was a Principal, acting in that role, at a school function, asking a teacher to pray publicly over their meal. Even that would likely be a minor quibble, had they not been explicitly told by the courts before to keep religion out of school. They had been publicly praying, proselytising, and promoting Christianity for decades, in all sorts of settings, in complete violation of the first amendment. The court order told them to stop - the question in this case was whether this latest prayer violated that order. Apparently it did not, because it was considered an accidental slip-up. But the prayer itself is still unconstitutional.

Would there be an uproar if the principal asked a school official to bless a school meal in the name of Allah, or the Hindu goddess Annapurnu, or the Wiccan goddess of Demeter? Not in the same way. It probably would have caused an uproar at the next PTA meeting, but I bet the Christians would have been upset. The ACLU might have reacted equally, but the jury is out on that one.

I hope the jury has an easy time deciding on the issue of a rhetorical question. I know I'd find it tough, what with no evidence and all - so they might be out for awhile.

The godly folk of Pace, Florida would be no doubt furious if some principal took it upon himself to introduce sundry, non-Christian religious blessings at school events. They would be well within their constitutional rights to complain that the principal was (bizarrely) introducing religion into their secular school. (Of course, no doubt, most of the anger would be that he brought another religion's blessing into their Christian school. But there, the constitution does not support them.) I shudder to think of the result if a Northern Florida Principal asked a teacher to dedicate a meal to the power and mercy of Allah.

So, this was a school event, held at a church with voluntary attendance.

... which is still a school event, and covered by the earlier court order. The venue is slightly disturbing, but not in and of itself a problem. It's just a building, if you're not using it for religious purposes. But this is a strike against them, not for them - it is dubious that they were holding school activities there at all.

The ACLU explains its position here.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

The godly folk of Pace, Florida would be no doubt furious if some principal took it upon himself to introduce sundry, non-Christian religious blessings at school events. They would be well within their constitutional rights to complain that the principal was (bizarrely) introducing religion into their secular school.

There is a Wiccan teacher at the local junior high school in my community who insists on beginning functions with a Wiccan ceremony. So far there are upset parents, but no ACLU.

[Jester]

There is a Wiccan teacher at the local junior high school in my community who insists on beginning functions with a Wiccan ceremony. So far there are upset parents, but no ACLU.

Has someone brought a case to them? They can't go to court by themselves if a) they don't know about it, and b ) they have nobody to represent. They need a party who can show their rights have been violated.

They might not be interested in going after lone cranks in any case - it wouldn't make an effective example, or establish a useful precedent, and their resources are not infinite. But if someone wanted to bring it to court, I'd certainly be rooting for them. Wiccan blessings are every bit as out of place as any other religion's.

-Jester

[Vandiablo]

There is a Wiccan teacher at the local junior high school in my community who insists on beginning functions with a Wiccan ceremony. So far there are upset parents, but no ACLU.

I have the impression that the ACLU doesn't bother with cases where some other organization will do the same work. Probably a finance or resource thingie. Why use up ACLU resources when you know that some social-conservative group like Family Research Council or somebody is going to use their resources?

I would bet, in this case, there's probably more to the story.

The most likely "more to the story": If people know the teacher is Wiccan, they'd look at everything he does as a Wiccan thing. For example, if he has everyone take a deep breath before starting class, some students would tell people that he's doing a Wiccan ceremony. People see what they think they're going to see. It's kind of like the suspicion that many people had when a Democrat president gives a speech to schoolchildren, he's out to indoctrinate them, right?

I would also bet, that if the story is indeed true, and no roundhead group steps up, the ACLU would eventually contest Wicca practices led by a teacher in a public school classroom. (Well, except for blood orgies, those are pretty secular.)

-V

(edit: unleaded a typo)

[kandrathe]

I have the impression that the ACLU doesn't bother with cases where some other organization will do the same work. Probably a finance or resource thingie. Why use up ACLU resources when you know that some social-conservative group like Family Research Council or somebody is going to use their resources?

I would bet, in this case, there's probably more to the story.

The most likely "more to the story": If people know the teacher is Wiccan, they'd look at everything he does as a Wiccan thing. For example, if he has everyone take a deep breath before starting class, some students would tell people that he's doing a Wiccan ceremony. People see what they think they're going to see. It's kind of like the suspicion that many people had when a Democrat president gives a speech to schoolchildren, he's out to indoctrinate them, right?

I would also bet, that if the story is indeed true, and no roundhead group steps up, the ACLU would eventually contest Wicca practices led by a teacher in a public school classroom. (Well, except for blood orgies, those are pretty secular.)

My children are not to the age where I need to be concerned yet about crazy teachers. I do meet each new teacher before school though to assure myself they are sane, and won't damage my child's psyche. At least, not damage their psyche any worse than I would were I to home school them. :)

From what I've heard the teacher in question is a bit kooky, and has come to school in full druid costume. But, then it might have been Halloween for all I know. You can't really trust hearsay. I just look back at the cavalcade of bizarre that educated me... ...they make Mrs Edelson (MIB) look fairly normal.

[kandrathe]

Brainwashing is when people don't even consider a different truth and this is not only the case with these religious sects. I know many people in Italy (also my own age) that are absolutely flabbergasted to hear that there are people not believing in God. In Holland where the Christian Democrats are since 100 years the biggest political force, only because they have their base of religious followers. And I am sure in the US this is the same. The example of it being very difficult for a non christian presidential candidate to be elected is a consequence of a form of brainwashing.

Do you think this is brainwashing?

Video shows NJ kids singing Obama praises

Here is the video? Mmm Mmm Mmm, lovin' propa ganda. "Red and yellow, black and white, all are equal in his sight". Which is a lyric from a kids song about Jesus.

And, at the end... the rewording of the Battle Hymn of the Republic is an ironic touch. Since, it was an anti-slavery song... which, now cannot be sung in schools due to its religious content.

[Jester]

Do you think this is brainwashing?

I think it's probably a little much. But I don't think it quite reaches the level of "brainwashing". The two key factors in "brainwashing" (if such a thing really has a useful definition) is the constant reinforcing of one orthodoxy, and the consistent deprivation of alternatives. Getting kids to sing a nice song about the president is maybe crossing a subtle line, but unless the stimulus is constant, or the alternatives suppressed, it strikes me as pretty harmless.

The tune to the Battle Hymn of the Republic is older than its famous lyrics. Reworkings of it, both secular and religious, are a dime a dozen. Even in its well-known form, however, I would imagine you could sneak it past the courts, since teaching it would have both a secular purpose (historical relevance) and would not necessarily be promoting a religion, unless you used it for that purpose. After all, there are perfectly Constitutional classes that teach about the Bible, in the context of history or theology. Religion is not utterly banished from schools. It is only its promotion that is a problem.

-Jester

(Deleted paragraph about Pace, Florida. While it is heavily dominated by Southern Baptists, and about 95% Christian, it is not quite a monoculture, as I had implied.)

[--Pete]

Hi,

Do you think this is brainwashing?

I think it is wrong. I think those responsible for it should be taken to court and there be told by a judge to cease that type of behavior. And I think that if they ignore that injunction and do it again, they should receive some punishment for their actions. Something meaningful like community service or a fine. Of course, if they claim that the second offense was an accident, the court should let them off scott free. Oh, wait, we're now talking NJ, not Florida. Never mind! :w00t:

I see your a strong defender of the separation of state and state. I don't remember that one, must have slept through that day's class.

--Pete

[Vandiablo]

A big differerence here is that we didn't hear about it because lefties complained about how awful it was that some poor teacher is getting flak for merely having children sing a song.

In other words, more hypocrisy from the right. They can understand the "position of authority" when children are made to sing about a Democrat but are blind to it when it's about their own triangular deity.

In fact, we could probably dig up some Coulter* and posit that refusing to sing a song about Our President During a Time of War is treason.

Another difference is that NJ school authorities recognize that it is not acceptable, whereas in Florida it took the ACLU and the courts to show the unacceptability that the school officials couldn't see, and still "forgot" about afterward.

As one who promotes that people should condemn the things on their own "side" when necessary I'll be direct: the singing was wrong.

Because, as I understand it, this was a public school. If I were sending my kids to the Sierra Club Day School, I'd be happy if they learned that song. In fact, I may watch the video and start singing it myself.

When raging about this video, though, several things should be remembered. Obama had just started his presidency a few weeks prior (during the "Amazing Accomplishment" phase, long before the "Socialist Indoctrinator" phase, and even before Rush's "want him to fail"), he's the first black prez, it was Black History Month, elementary school kids really love America, and are usually uninformed about a president's differences from his opponent party. I'm not defending it, just pointing out that it's not as sinister as it seems, those were happier times.

If you're really bored, consider also the song "Davy Crockett". Do schoolkids in Tennessee learn this song? This song has anti-congress sentiment, as well as saying the Davy fixed the crack in the Liberty Bell (while he was in Washington and the bell was in Philadelphia, and the bell IIRC was not cracked during his lifetime).

-V

*she's obviously undead, so no digging necessary

[DeeBye]

Do you think this is brainwashing?

Video shows NJ kids singing Obama praises

Here is the video?

No, this is brainwashing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE2WEJ6BX8U

[kandrathe]

No, this is brainwashing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wE2WEJ6BX8U

So, that's at a public school?

[Chesspiece_face]

Do you think this is brainwashing?

Video shows NJ kids singing Obama praises

Here is the video? Mmm Mmm Mmm, lovin' propa ganda. "Red and yellow, black and white, all are equal in his sight". Which is a lyric from a kids song about Jesus.

And, at the end... the rewording of the Battle Hymn of the Republic is an ironic touch. Since, it was an anti-slavery song... which, now cannot be sung in schools due to its religious content.

If they had to come in and sing that song every day, then yeah, that would be brainwashing. When I first saw this tape I gave an uncontrollable facepalm, but the more I think about it the more I have to come to the conclusion that this is much ado about nothing. Would we be watching this tape and hearing all about it if the subject was Martin Luthor King Jr? What about all the other Black historical figures that they could have done a song about to learn about during black history month? No, we hear about this because it fits the talking points of the day. Those being lefty indoctrination. It's ironic, I think, that this clip has probably been played now filling more time than any of those kids or the teacher ever took putting the song together.

[kandrathe]

If they had to come in and sing that song every day, then yeah, that would be brainwashing.

Yes. That too would be bad. But, the point is that while the method and topic swirls around, the political message and its daily persistence remains the same. In my day it was nuclear proliferation, and mutually assured destruction. For kids today its global warming, and social justice.

Would we be watching this tape and hearing all about it if the subject was Martin Luther King Jr? What about all the other Black historical figures that they could have done a song about to learn about during black history month?

No. That would be appropriate. I wish there were a song about MLK, and some of the other notable black heroes. I guess the other subtlety here is that they take popular Christian kid songs and alter the lyrics, which 1) becomes leftist propaganda, and 2) mentally associates Obama with the original songs subject. It's no longer "Jesus loves me", it becomes "Barrack Obama loves me". Dr. King is a historical figure who has become considered a great influence. While, President Obama, being the first non-white president is noteworthy, he hasn't yet earned his wings as an American hero. Tripling the deficit, while watching revenues plummet by 60% doesn't qualify as brave until we actually pull out of the nose dive and get control of our spending and rebuild a thriving economy.

This is pure cult of personality adulation. Set your clock back 8 years and ask how people would have reacted had there been kids singing the GWB song in any public grade school.

Also, there are far many more historical black hero's that truly deserve to be studied by school children.

[Jester]

Tripling the deficit, while watching revenues plummet by 60% doesn't qualify as brave until we actually pull out of the nose dive and get control of our spending and rebuild a thriving economy.

Total federal revenues are down by *sixty percent*? Where'd you get that figure?

The "Obama doesn't get to be an American hero until he's a Libertarian hero" might make sense for you, but other people are hardly bound to follow your opinion on the matter. The deficit did not just triple suddenly from unsound management. It tripled (in the short run) because that was the advice of Obama's economists as to how to "rebuild a thriving economy".

-Jester